The influence of different application patterns of propofol on the sedation courses during drug-induced sleep endoscopy.

Objective: The course of sedation during drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) depends on the application pattern of the sedative drug. The depth of sedation should imitate light and deep sleep as well. Moreover, there should be as many breathing cycles as possible available for observation during light and deep sedation. The aim of the study was to evaluate different rates of propofol application with respect to the achieved depth and length of the course of sedation. Methods: Sixty-three consecutive patients with obstructive sleep apnea and/or snoring undergoing DISE were randomly sedated by propofol perfusion at seven different application patterns: 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22 mg/kg/h (0.233, 0.267, 0.3, 0.317, 0.333, 0.367 mg/kg/min) per perfusor and individual bolus application 10 mg each. Sedation depth was monitored by BiSpectral Index™ (BIS). The influence of baseline parameters and the courses of sedation were analyzed. Results: The application rate was the only factor that influenced the depth of sedation. Basic parameters (gender, age, body mass index, apnea-hypopnea index) had no influence on the depth of sedation. The sedation depth was dependent on the rate of propofol application. Regimes at 14 and 16 mg/kg/h as well as bolus application did not reach BIS levels below 50 representing deep sleep. Propofol doses of more than 20 mg/kg/h led to rapid decreases of sedation levels below deep sleep niveau. Propofol rates between 18 and 20 mg/kg/h enable BIS levels below 50 representing deep sleep and providing enough breathing cycles for observation. Conclusion: Lower application rates of propofol provide slower courses of sedation and shallower depths of sedation. A rate of 14 mg/kg/h might be appropriate to reach a sedation plateau at light sleep. A rate of 18 mg/kg/h leads to a sedation, corresponding to deep sleep. The combination of both rates might be a suitable pattern for performing sedation-controlled DISE. Level of evidence: 2: Randomized trial.

Treatment of tracheoesophageal fistulas following laryngectomy by customized prostheses-A bicentric case series.

Objective: Tracheoesophageal fistulas (TEF) following laryngectomy cause immense restrictions due to the inability of oral feeding, loss of voice rehabilitation, penetration of saliva, and permanent need of inflatable tracheal cannulas. Patients are consistently in threat of fatal aspiration pneumonias. The failure rate of surgical approaches to close the fistulas is high and an ultima ratio option by customized silicone prostheses can be considered. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 26 patients with a TEF was performed. Results: The fistulas occurred in average 40 months after laryngectomy caused by an enlargement of the voice fistula in 17 patients and problems in wound healing in 6 patients. The mean diameter of the fistula was 32 × 18 mm. Eight patients were treated by a button-shaped and 18 by a tube-shaped prosthesis. Complete oral feeding was possible in 8 and additional feeding by percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in 16 patients. Voice rehabilitation by voice prostheses was possible in 18 cases. Fifteen patients died in the course of the treatment either due to oncological progression or other reasons. The median follow-up time of the patients alive was 36 months (max 88 months) with 2.2 protheses replacements in mean (max 11). Conclusion: The treatment of TEF by customized prostheses can be considered as an ultima ration option if other approaches had failed. At least, partial oral nutrition and voice rehabilitation as well as protection from aspiration can be achieved in the majority of the patients. Level of Evidence: 4-Case series.

Follow-up of a national web-based survey on the SARS-CoV-2 infectious state of otorhinolaryngologists in Germany.

PURPOSE: The SARS-CoV­2 pandemic has affected the health and practice of otorhinolaryngologists (ORLs) for over 1 year. Follow-up data of a national survey with German ORLs were evaluated regarding differences between the two waves of the pandemic. METHODS: As in the initial survey, German ORLs were addressed via e­mail through the German Society of ORL, Head and Neck Surgery and the German ENT Association. All ORLs afflicted with SARS-CoV­2 were invited to participate in a web-based survey. General data on infections and concomitant parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: Since the start of the pandemic, 129 ORLs reported testing positive for SARS-CoV­2 in Germany. The ORLs infected during the first wave had a relative risk (RR) of 4.07 (95% CI: 3.20; 5.19) of contracting SARS-CoV­2. During the second wave, the RR decreased to 0.35 (95% CI: 0.28; 0.45). The availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) increased from the first to the second wave along with an increased perception of protection in the professional environment. The source of infection shifted from infections via medical staff during the first wave to patients and household exposure during the second wave. Regular medical practice was resumed by clinicians and general practitioners in the second wave. Nevertheless, a proportionally lower infection rate was observed compared with the German population as a whole. CONCLUSION: The data reflect a unique long-term survey of ORLs during the pandemic. Differences in the source of infection were seen between the first and second wave, confirming the need for appropriate PPE for medical professionals working in high-risk environments. Further strategies to reduce the risk of infection include consistent testing for SARS-CoV­2 in healthcare professionals, patients, and the general public as well as vaccination of high-risk medical groups.

Results of a national web-based survey on the SARS-CoV-2 infectious state of otorhinolaryngologists in Germany.

PURPOSE: SARS-CoV-2 is detected on the mucosa of the upper airways to a high degree. In the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, otorhinolaryngologists (ORL) are assumed to be at high risk due to close contact with the mucosa of the upper airways. No data are yet available providing evidence that ORLs have an increased risk of infection. METHODS: German ORLs were invited via e-mail through the German Society of ORL, Head and Neck Surgery and the German ENT Association to participate in a web-based survey about infection with SARS-CoV-2 and development of COVID-19. Data of infections and concomitant parameters in German ORLs were collected and compared to the total number of infections in Germany. RESULTS: Out of 6383 German ORLs, 970 (15%) participated. 54 ORLs reported testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Compared to the total population of Germany, ORLs have a relative risk of 3.67 (95% CI 2.82; 4.79) of contracting SARS-CoV-2. Domestic quarantine was conducted in 96.3% of cases. Two individuals were admitted to hospital without intensive care. No casualties were reported. In 31 cases, the source of infection was not identifiable whereas 23 had a clear medical aetiology: infected patients: n = 5, 9.26%; medical staff: n = 13, 14.1%. 9.26% (n = 5) of the identified cases were related to contact to infected family members (n = 3), closer neighbourhood (n = 1) or general public (n = 1). There was no identified increased risk of infection due to performing surgery. CONCLUSION: German ORLs have an almost 3.7-fold risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 compared to the population baseline level. Appropriate protection appears to be necessary for this occupational group.

[Voice self-concept in 230 German patients after head-and-neck malignancy]. / Das Stimmliche Selbstkonzept bei 230 Patienten nach Kopf-Hals-Tumortherapie.

INTRODUCTION: The German questionnaire 'Fragebogen zur Erfassung des Stimmlichen Selbstkonzepts (FESS)', published by Nusseck et al 2015, evaluates voice self-concept in 3 scales. There are no normative data for clinical populations published. Gaining an insight into patients' voice self-concept might help in taking individualized decisions in head & neck cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 230 patients visiting our clinic in head & neck cancer follow-up care were administered the questionnaire. Scale value distributions in this population are described, influences of age and gender investigated. RESULTS: The questionnaire performs very well with regard to the scale value distributions. Age and gender effects are tiny, so our data can be used for clinical comparison purposes without respect to gender and age. CONCLUSIONS: The FESS questionnaire appears to be suitable for patients after head & neck malignancy and normative data for this population are published here.